If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
#172
|
|||
|
|||
20D: ROLLING INTO SPRING!------ ATTN: digirati
Lionel wrote:
Richard Polhill wrote: wrote: On Apr 4, 7:21 pm, Richard Polhill wrote: As is repeatedly pointed out: 35mm is *not* a format: it is a roll film width. And as I asked before, but you avoided: Please name the format of those cameras that use 35mm film. You say the format *isn't* "35mm"... So, what *is* it? It was once called "small format". They were "miniature cameras" when they first started to arrive. Why do you feel a format has to have a name? The newsgroup is 35mm and for those of you too young to have encountered roll films, 35mm is a size of sprocketed roll film, equal to half 70mm roll film. It has nothing whatsoever to do with a format except that the widest the format can be is about 28mm between the sprockets. As somebody who seems to require these frame sizes to be named, what other named formats do you know that are named? If you think "medium" then try again: 60x70mm? 60x45mm? 60x60mm? 60x90mm? Which is it? There are half plate and quarter plate in the large format world. APS has three named formats: APS-H, APS-C and APS-P. The only other named frame I can think of is "four thirds". Can you think of any more? The most common photography format turned out to be 24x36mm, but there is nothing about this newsgroup that relates it to that frame size. I know that the digerati no longer understand that there is such a thing as film size, but that is what the "35mm" in the name refers to. As an OT aside, 35mm originated in cinematography where they use a format based on 4 sprockets at 22x16mm (named, for your benefit, "academy format") and variants thereof. There are, of course, other 35mm cinematography formats but the 4-sprocket system is preferred as they work on more projectors and cameras with just a change of masking, frame and lens. *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* *DROOL* Isn't that intelligent bit of gear. |
#173
|
|||
|
|||
20D: ROLLING INTO SPRING!------ ATTN: digirati
On Apr 10, 7:00 pm, Richard Polhill
wrote: wrote: On Apr 4, 7:21 pm, Richard Polhill wrote: As is repeatedly pointed out: 35mm is *not* a format: it is a roll film width. And as I asked before, but you avoided: Please name the format of those cameras that use 35mm film. You say the format *isn't* "35mm"... So, what *is* it? It was once called "small format". They were "miniature cameras" when they first started to arrive. Why do you feel a format has to have a name? Well, for a start, *you* used format names many many times in this post alone. Take away those names and it would be a little confusing. And aren't *you* trying to restrict the posting topics to a 'sort' of equipment? How the heck else are you going to do it, unless you use some sort of categorisation (ie a 'format' by any other name)? The newsgroup is 35mm and for those of you too young to have encountered roll films, 35mm is a size of sprocketed roll film, equal to half 70mm roll film. It has nothing whatsoever to do with a format except that the widest the format can be is about 28mm between the sprockets. It has *everything* to do with a format, as it is *commonly used* to denote all cameras that use 35mm size film/sensors. An eminently sensible use, except to you obviously. As somebody who seems to require these frame sizes to be named, what other named formats do you know that are named? If you think "medium" then try again: 60x70mm? 60x45mm? 60x60mm? 60x90mm? Which is it? Yes, just as 35mm film had those little caeras that took half-size images. Thanks for reinforcing my point - "Medium Format" has become the commonly used name for cameras that use those sizes. Just as "35mm" has come to be the name for the 'smaller' cameras. Yes, very sensible, I agree. (By the way, do you really refer to them by those names - we use 6x7, 6x6, etc, or maybe 120, 220, etc in these here parts - yes, I use film..) There are half plate and quarter plate in the large format world. APS has three named formats: APS-H, APS-C and APS-P. The only other named frame I can think of is "four thirds". Can you think of any more? So we have Large Format, Medium Format, 35mm, APS, 4/3, ... yes, all reasonably sensibly named *formats*. There are others, but what's your point - you seem to be repeating MINE. The most common photography format turned out to be 24x36mm, but there is nothing about this newsgroup that relates it to that frame size. I know that the digerati no longer understand that there is such a thing as film size, but that is what the "35mm" in the name refers to. So you say that 35mm doesn't relate to 36x24mm film frames, but that's why it means film...??? Uhuh. That insulting, generalised "digerati" comment is EXACTLY the problem here. Listen to yourself. I, as do most film users I suspect (note I don't use insulting terms to refer to them, you *hypocrite*), understand that 35mm is a film size, and is also used to denote a format of camera - a format which has no other name, as you admit yourself... As an OT aside, 35mm originated in cinematography where they use a format based on 4 sprockets at 22x16mm (named, for your benefit, "academy format") and variants thereof. There are, of course, other 35mm cinematography formats but the 4-sprocket system is preferred as they work on more projectors and cameras with just a change of masking, frame and lens. And when it came into use as a still film, it was denoted as "135" - you missed that bit somewhere... Is this fgroup about film cameras, not still, then? So thanks for the lengthy, largely unnecessary reply. So in essence, you say that 35mm cameras are more correctly called 'small format' or 'miniature'. Anyone here - you included, heard that terminology recently? *Ever*? My point remains. 35mm is a film size, yes, whoopee. It is also the universally accepted name of the *FORMAT*. Just because something is referred to as a 35mm camera, does not, I repeat NOT, mean the camera must take film. It's a simple matter of common usage. So that particular argument holds zero H2O. And a final quote, from no less than Leica.. "With just a few simple procedures you can switch over to genuine Leica quality digital photography: the LEICA DIGITAL MODULE R is easily fitted in place of the standard camera back..... quality levels commonly seen only in large-format digital studio photography attainable for the first time with a 35 mm-based system" Seems even *they* think it is a "format"... (O; |
#174
|
|||
|
|||
20D: ROLLING INTO SPRING!------ ATTN: digerati
|
#175
|
|||
|
|||
20D: ROLLING INTO SPRING!------ ATTN: digirati
William Graham wrote:
"Tony Polson" wrote in message news Richard Polhill wrote: Mr.T wrote: And as I said, FF DSLR's also have 35mm sensors anyway. Perhaps you'd better go away and find out what "35mm" *means* before you comment. It's hopeless, Richard. You would think these people had never had the benefit of any formal education at all. One of my problems with all this is the fact that I have to read/answer/dismiss over 100 emails a day, which takes up a significant proportion of my free time. So, I can't afford to join any more news groups. Fortunately, I still shoot film, so most of my questions/comments are applicable to this group. However, I do use digital equipment such as scanners and printers, so occasionally I cross the line with a digital question or comment. If, for example, I had a question about my film scanner, It would be a lot of trouble for me to join the digital group, ask my question, and then have to monitor that group for several days in order to get my answers before leaving the group....So, I just throw it out to this group, and hope for the best, even though it is off-topic. The quality of the personnel here is better than the other groups anyway, so any question I might have is better given to this group than any other, in my opinion.....IOW, I trust the answers I might get from here better than some other group, even if they are specialists on digital equipment....... In fact the digital photo groups should know nothing about scanners g. I would stay in the DSLR group only but there's lots of talk in here relevant to me & most of the threads I start are relevant in here. I like using old MF lenses on my DSLR. If it's a question about raw converters, I'll post to the DSLR group. I did have to dump the digital photo group, the volume is way too high and the quality not that great for the effort. I also follow plain old alt.photography too which gets a few interesting discussions & not an overwhelming volume. |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads | ||||
Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
20D: ROLLING INTO SPRING ! | Annika1980 | 35mm Photo Equipment | 0 | March 27th 07 01:20 AM |
FA: rolling backpack | solarsell | Medium Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | July 11th 06 03:37 PM |
FA: rolling backpack | solarsell | Large Format Equipment For Sale | 0 | July 11th 06 03:37 PM |
FA: rolling backpack | solarsell | 35mm Equipment for Sale | 0 | July 11th 06 03:37 PM |
FA: rolling backpack | solarsell | Digital Photo Equipment For Sale | 0 | July 11th 06 03:37 PM |